HN user

shpeedy

17 karma
Posts0
Comments21
View on HN
No posts found.
Ultra Safe Nuclear 6 years ago

You are joking about "small numbers of deaths", right?, because this millennia is not over yet.

Skip learning of sed and awk and jump straight to perl instead.

  $ perl --help
  ...
  -F/pattern/       split() pattern for -a switch (//'s are optional)
  -l[octal]         enable line ending processing, specifies line terminator
  -a                autosplit mode with -n or -p (splits $_ into @F)

  -n                assume "while (<>) { ... }" loop around program
  -p                assume loop like -n but print line also, like sed
  -e program        one line of program (several -e's allowed, omit programfile)

Example. List file name and size:
  ls -l | perl -ae 'print "@F[8..$#F], $F[4]"'

Previously, Firefox was fine on computer with 2GB of memory and hundreds of tabs. Now, 8GB is not enough.

Yep. Pilot Wave theory is underdeveloped theory, but it helps to develop intuition. Walking droplets are even better for that. IMHO, it's better to use QM to solve QM problems in science, but use walking droplets and Pilot Wave Theory to develop intuition for others. Walking droplets are easy to demonstrate. Double slit experiment can be reproduced in school lab. This way, quantum physics can be taught in school for children of age 12+, so they will be ready to solve much more complex problems when they will be PhD.

Entanglement is hard problem for PWT. Photos of entangled photons[0] are intriguing, because they look similar to behavior of walking droplets in some experiments (see dotwave.org feed). I hope, someone will be able to reproduce entanglement in macro. Currently, my top priority is to reproduce Stern–Gerlach experiment in macro (I suspect that interference between external field and particle wave creates channel, which guides particle into spot, but it better to see it once). Second priority is creation of "photons" in macro. Entanglement will be third. IMHO, all of them require microgravity to reproduce in 3D.

[0] https://phys.org/news/2019-07-scientists-unveil-first-ever-i...

We have no perfect theory to explain everything, so it's just tradeoff, exchange of one set of inconsistencies for another set of inconsistencies, but with better intuition. I'm doing it here, in my country.

The problem with current theories is that I understand them when I reading them. It's like piece of complex code or book with complex but boring text, like phonebook. I can follow it, when I read it, but I cannot reproduce it when book is closed.

Can we teach a phonebook to kids? Yep. Is it useful? Nope.

Recently, I did "quantum physics in one picture" experiment. Results are very good: lots of reposts, comments, interest in topic.

Field is mathematical abstraction, used in mathematical model, to represent a physical thing.

Physical things are real. Mathematical abstractions are not. OpenGL is not real too, but it looks very real and accurately predicts reality. In OpenGL, field is array, e.g. "float[][][] field;".

So, EM field describes strength of EM force in every point of mathematical model. Nature of EM force is unknown. Right?

Let's talk about nature of EM force.

Analogy: look at a typical tropical cyclone. It rotates. Is it rotating because a unknown property of an air molecule? No. It rotates because our planet rotates, while air molecules are just trying to keep their positions. I.e. it's rotation of planet + inertia of molecules.

Is it possible that EM force is happens because our local space is moving trough global space by non-linear trajectory, so it just non-linear trajectory of local space + inertia of rotating and vibrating particles?